From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx3.wp.pl (mx3.wp.pl [212.77.101.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 023EA218ADD for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2026 09:02:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.77.101.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767949368; cv=none; b=Fm5OUyvcHShTjPg+EdBdwiNa5p15EZdsCI1kEvnhIvUP2S0X7tn9dg8ev1wavKljbHbPnvk5tGED8GdvMG5Zvb9YHZYRPaLcmVEIu318HlzNhOJYxcP1+dyx88V6L0FXTQ2+aMxIBwk1a7ZtgA8IGt7lneWgtMDSdqiOo6twVEM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767949368; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xQ8+grcG06QD1Q4C8WtuUmerpKw9YJvgMKCRXTCT/AE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ZmkeCxeI8t7mPTjokSf+QIldn9XYgN3j9YcFBWBThiMaaVFsao7plHNgY5BU9hVamzpL1Rfi5+Ll/oxElNN1g9Iq0Pz2n5FvxA6b/9HJ1DYjgTPVLGM7ac77pWy6wpHgkrCERl22YuB1z1oJcfQO3yz1jjaAjtctiv1v+KjgqdU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=wp.pl; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wp.pl; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wp.pl header.i=@wp.pl header.b=Wix/oSe/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.77.101.10 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=wp.pl Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wp.pl Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wp.pl header.i=@wp.pl header.b="Wix/oSe/" Received: (wp-smtpd smtp.wp.pl 42208 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2026 10:02:28 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wp.pl; s=20241105; t=1767949348; bh=RRfBtMQPhUJY5yA2JbypY0+yMfkyIIXFoRkKIfLJoto=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject; b=Wix/oSe/XKst1KTpV6DSeKE7S1lNIPLif6BE+aKpCqia9AKFswHSsYez+ZW7SCzCN lpnAmEIANOXaqOAlxIMXPv/UtdSsUSVuLOFdOV3DxFjnsrNkdv1IYd0tS5WR6Jq8Kw Ywa5LsLmI1XT6I90cF7fWvTv4x4QMpg4g9rrbcKenTKUYrkGoQZsOKdh8ZDOxpXKm6 Z6IOatB/xOoZpI1GWhC/sNiC1fVxVtKyWde4B15szgakSun4frd252w6WQoMM88H5P ZlNpoVY4rhwNGVuh/69u7qMJBfXM2ZqD3jHLYkc00YtxeaPBNlacWdqv9xNTn0iDP7 u27UMvDJuYPhQ== Received: from 89-64-9-177.dynamic.play.pl (HELO localhost) (stf_xl@wp.pl@[89.64.9.177]) (envelope-sender ) by smtp.wp.pl (WP-SMTPD) with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted SMTP for ; 9 Jan 2026 10:02:28 +0100 Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 10:02:27 +0100 From: Stanislaw Gruszka To: Tuo Li Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] wifi: iwlegacy: 3945-rs: add a defensive WARN_ON_ONCE for il_sta in il3945_rs_get_rate() Message-ID: <20260109090227.GA48150@wp.pl> References: <20260109034014.187124-1-islituo@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260109034014.187124-1-islituo@gmail.com> X-WP-MailID: 42e53ab5e7fc937c426f05b08d1c6e07 X-WP-AV: skaner antywirusowy Poczty Wirtualnej Polski X-WP-SPAM: NO 0000001 [IbJV] Hi Tuo, On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 11:40:14AM +0800, Tuo Li wrote: > In this function, il_sta is not expected to be NULL. Add a defensive > WARN_ON_ONCE() to catch this unexpected condition and aid debugging. > > Signed-off-by: Tuo Li > --- > v3: > * Replace plain NULL check with WARN_ON_ONCE() and update subject to better > reflect defensive nature of the check. > Thanks to Johannes Berg and Stanislaw Gruszka for helpful advice. > v2: > * Return early for uninitialized STA il data and align D_RATE messages with > il3945_rs_tx_status(). Add a wifi: prefix to the patch title. > Thanks to Stanislaw Gruszka for the helpful advice. > --- > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c > index 1826c37c090c..463565ce14af 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-rs.c > @@ -626,6 +626,9 @@ il3945_rs_get_rate(void *il_r, struct ieee80211_sta *sta, void *il_sta, > > D_RATE("enter\n"); > > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!il_sta)) > + return; > + Sorry for giving you wrong advice before, but after examining related code I agree with Johannes the il_sta can not be NULL. Now, I think we should just remove il_sta/rs_sta pointer check. Regards Stanislaw